Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/211461
Authors: 
Melo, Valdir
Year of Publication: 
2019
Series/Report no.: 
Texto para Discussão No. 2510
Abstract (Translated): 
The present text deals with the importance of methodological debates in research organizations that formulate studies, proposals and appraisals of public policies. They should be open to diversity and innovation of conceptions, interpretations and methods. The text also expounds this methodological vision: to a large extent, scientific knowledge consists of conjectures and educated guesses, connected overall in a uncertain and fallible web. The connection is often made by means of nondemonstrative logic. Some subjective elements enter into nearly all arguments, inferences and reasonings. Hence, appraisals of almost all of them are personal. In science, alongside abundant disagreements, there are agreements and settlements; but there are no factual truths that may be definitely established by holders of a rank or position in any organization.
Subjects: 
educated guess
nondemonstrative logic
subjective probability
tacit knowledge
JEL: 
B40
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.